One analysis of the Digital Education Revolution

One analysis of

the Digital Education Revolution

David Joneshttp://davidtjones.wordpress.co

m

http://www.flickr.com/photos/wfryer/2516648940/

http://bit.ly/derAnalysis

(Rittel & Webber, 1973)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/wxmom/2052715752/

As you solve the problemyou learn more about it

Solutions are neitherright nor wrong

There is no ultimate

test of a solution

The problem can be described in many ways

Description

Analysis

Suggestions

http://www.flickr.com/photos/wscullin/3770015203/

Description

Analysis

Suggestions


aims to contribute sustainable and meaningful change to teaching and learning in Australian schools that will prepare students for further education, training and to

live and work in a digital world.

$2.4b over 8 years

http://www.flickr.com/photos/tomheld/2997580946/

(ANAO, 2010)

Online curriculum resources & digital architecture

ICT Innovation Fund

National Secondary Computer Fund $1.4b +

$807m

$16m

$28.6m

http://www.flickr.com/photos/brad_holt/3604854521/

Removal of 1st order barriers(Ertmer,

1999)

School + technology != change

Policy by visitors to the digital world

Limited understanding of change

Won’t achieve purpose

Using failed approaches……

Description

Analysis

Suggestions


http://flickr.com/photos/joits/225824796/

The Ps Framework

Past experience

People

Place

Product

Process

Purpose

Pedagogy

http://bit.ly/PsFramework

Purpose



http://www.flickr.com/photos/londonmatt/3163571645/

http://www.digitaleducationrevolution.gov.au/

A common theme in many countries’ national policies is that innovative, knowledge-based economies driven by talent and creativity are the way to build sustainable

societies in the future. (Moyle, 2010, p. 6)

Australian students must be prepared for living andworking in a highly technological and informationrich world that is rapidly changing. (DEEWR,

2010)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/karenapricot/1218446563/

Melbourne declaration etc.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/29901446@N07/2800023900/

http://bit.ly/pzPd8C


Digital educationrevolution




National Curriculum



Core curriculums that hark backto 20th-century educational beliefs…..

(Harpur, 2011)

The curriculum pays lip service to technology butfails to consider how it is changing the way teachersteach and children learn.



National Curriculum


NAPLAN




National Curriculum


National rewardsfor great teachers

NAPLAN




National Curriculum


National rewardsfor great teachers

NAPLAN


Current political winds are blowing..toward policies of standardisingschool and emphasising the kindsof accountability practices that canparalyze risk-taking

(Collins & Halverson, 2009, p. 113)


http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/7679076.html


ICT Innovation Fund


$807m

$16m

$28.6m

$28.6m

$16m

Computers

Rewards for great teachers$425m

http://bit.ly/pxuDjB

The wrong drivers• Accountability• Individual over group solutions• Technology• Fragmented strategies



NAPLAN



NAPLANRewards for great teachers



NAPLANRewards for great teachersDER



NAPLANRewards for great teachersDERDissonant strategies

Federal

State



NAPLANRewards for great teachersDERDissonant strategies

Federal

State

Public

Catholic

Independent


fail to achieve whole system reform

Even worse, chances are that such strategies willcause backward movement relative to other countriesthat are using the right drivers

Past experience

http://bit.ly/nipT8I

Those who cannot remember

the past are condemned to repeat it. (Santayana,

2010)



Our school system will be completelychanged within the next ten years.


Our school system will be completelychanged within the next ten years.191

3

Books will soon be obsolete in the schools

It is possible to teach every branch of human knowledgewith the motion picture.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/nostri-imago/3439637848/

Our school system will be completelychanged within the next ten years.

(Saettler, 1968, p. 98)


the computer is going to bea catalyst of very deep andradical change in theeducational system


the computer is going to bea catalyst of very deep andradical change in theeducational system198

4

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rmesquita/2544780949/

the computer is going to bea catalyst of very deep andradical change in theeducational system

(Papert, 1984)

Students today can’t preparebark to calculate their problems.They depend on their slates whichare more expensive. What will they do when the slate is droppedand it breaks? They will beunable to write!

Teacher’s Conference, 1703

http://www.flickr.com/photos/knobil/66832699/

Students today depend on paper toomuch. They don’t know how to writeon a slate without getting chalk dustall over themselves. They can’t cleana slate properly. What will they dowhen they run out of paper?

Principal’s Association 1815

http://www.flickr.com/photos/knobil/66832699/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/shadfan66/4131388204/

..waiting in vain for the promised revolutionin teaching and learning because we have

consistently, almost single-mindedly,

used technology to automate the past instead of employing

our best thinking and efforts to create a new future

(Bush & Mott, 2009)


Through a single sign-on portal they will be

supported with relevant information, expert advice and practical and strategic tools

ICT Innovation Fund

http://gapingvoid.com/2006/10/13/walled-gardens-explained/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/dquach/462387564/

Purpose





http://www.flickr.com/photos/rileyroxx/169905405/

Who has to learn?

School Students

School teachers

Teacher educators

School leaders

Politicians

General public


Who has to learn?

School Students

School teachers

Teacher educators

School leaders

Politicians

General public


ICT Innovation Fund


$807m

$16m

$28.6m

Teaching Teachers

for the Future

Some of the anticipated activities will include the development of a website with ICTE resources and discussions, the establishment of an ICTE reference

group that includes participation from across the University and regular workshops for staff.


http://www.flickr.com/photos/judybaxter/136158323/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/judybaxter/136158323/

Some of the anticipated activities will include the development of a website with ICTE resources and discussions, the establishment of an ICTE reference

group that includes participation from across the University and regular workshops for staff.


Used by small numbers…usually not those most in need (The National GAP,

2009)


Who has to learn?

School Students

School teachers

Teacher educators

School leaders

Politicians

General public


ICT Innovation Fund


$807m

$16m

$28.6m Online teacher

toolkit

Anywhere, anytime professional

learning

Leading ICT in learning

http://gapingvoid.com/2006/10/13/walled-gardens-explained/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/philmanker/3601560371/

Quality teaching requires developing a nuanced understanding of the complex relationships between technology, content, and pedagogy, and using this understanding to develop appropriate,

context-specific strategies and representations. (Mishra & Koehler, 2006)

Place

(Trigwell, 2001)

(Trigwell, 2001)

NAPLAN

(Trigwell, 2001)

NAPLAN

Nationalcurriculum

(Trigwell, 2001)

NAPLAN

Nationalcurriculum

Great rewards..

(Trigwell, 2001)

NAPLAN

Nationalcurriculum

Great rewards..

Disengaged

parents

(Trigwell, 2001)

NAPLAN

Nationalcurriculum

Great rewards..

Disengaged

parents

Respectfor teachers

(Trigwell, 2001)

NAPLAN

Nationalcurriculum

Great rewards..

Disengaged

parents

Respectfor teachers

The School

System

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jasonnahrung/2495920825/

a highly evolved, complex institutional system can be locked in place and very difficult to change

(Collins & Halverson, 2009)

The basic grammar of schooling, like the shape of classrooms, has remained remarkably stable

over the decades (Tyack and Tobin, 1994, p. 454)

Dimension Apprenticeship Universal schooling Lifelong learning

Responsibility Parents State Individuals and parents

Expectations Social reproduction Success for all Individual choice

Content Practical skills Disciplinary knowledge

Learning how to learn

Pedagogy Apprenticeship Didactisim Interaction

Assessment Observation Testing Embedded assessment

Location Home School Anywhere

Culture Adult Peer Mixed-age

Relationships Personal bonds Authority figures Computer-mediated interaction

(Collins & Halverson, 2009)

Purpose





Current Schools != Digital world

Decade Market demands

Ideal firm IT Performance criteria

Technology base

IT applications

1960s Price The efficient firm

Efficiency Mainframe – batch processing

Data processing/ automation of routine tasks

1970s Price, quality The quality firm

Efficiency + quality

Mainframe – batch processing

Functional efficiency

1980s Price, quality, choice/delivery time

The flexible firm

Efficiency + quality + flexibility

Personal computing

Personal productivity

1990s and beyond

Price, quality, choice/delivery time, uniqueness

The innovating firm

Efficiency + quality + flexibility + innovative ability

Networks Organisational transformation

(Ward and Daniel, 2006, p. 3)

http://read.bi/ouwiqJ

People

http://www.flickr.com/photos/shawnzlea/1460248872/

http://bit.ly/rlnxGO

Visitor-Resident

http://flickr.com/photos/chrisjfry/323461344/

http://bit.ly/oJDBKb

Moore’s chasm

(Geoghegan, 1994)

http://flickr.com/photos/chrisjfry/323461344/

http://bit.ly/oJDBKb

Moore’s chasm

(Geoghegan, 1994)

Early adopters Early majorityLike radical change Like gradual changeVisionary PragmaticProject oriented Process orientedRisk takers Risk averseWilling to experiment Need proven usesSelf sufficient Need supportRelate horizontally(interdisciplinary)

Relate vertically (within discipline)

Product

http://www.flickr.com/photos/betchaboy/4305378767/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/scobleizer/2264764769/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ivyfield/4497654605/


http://bit.ly/qYvtfi

By their very nature, newer digital technologies, which

are protean, unstable, and opaque, present new challenges to teachers who are struggling to use moretechnology in their teaching

(Koehler & Mishra, 2009)

Is the first metamedium, and as such it has degrees offreedom for representation and expression neverbefore encountered and as yet barely investigated

Alan Kay


Alfred Bork

(Stager, 2009)

Computer to present information and test.

Teacher replacement


Alfred Bork

(Stager, 2009)

Computer to help teacher present

Tom Synder

One computer classroom


Alfred Bork

(Stager, 2009)

the protean nature of the computerallowed learners to shape its useand construct knowledge in waysand domains otherwise impossible

Tom Synder

Seymour Papert

http://paralleldivergence.com/2011/07/18/digital-education-real-illusion/

One of the barriers to including technologies in teaching and learning can be the lack of appropriate furniture on which to place computers in classrooms, in teachers’ preparation areas and in computer laboratories, and this impedes the uptake of technologies enabled pedagogies

(Moyle, 2010)

Process

Author Plan-driven process Losing weightWeick & Quinn (1999) Episodic change Continuous change

Brews & Hunt (1999) Planning school Learning school

Seely Brown & Hagel (2005)

Push system Pull systems

Hutchins (1991) Supervisor reflection and intervention

Local adjustment

Truex et al (2000) Traditional design Emergent design

March (1991) Exploitation Exploration

Boehm & Turner (2003) Plan-driven Agile

Mintzberg (1989) Deliberate strategy Emergent Strategy

Kurtz & Snowden (2007)

Idealistic Naturalistic

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mwichary/2188958154/

Systems’ behaviour must be relatively stable and predictable

Designer’s must be able to manipulatethe system’s behaviour directly.

The designer’s must be able to determine accuratelythe goals or criteria of success.

Limitations (Introna,

1996)

Australian students must be prepared for living andworking in a highly technological and informationrich world that is rapidly changing. (DEEWR,

2010)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/karenapricot/1218446563/

Management by Objectives works if youknow the objectives, 90% of the time you don’t Peter

Drucker

Process

Author Plan-driven EmergentWeick & Quinn (1999) Episodic change Continuous change

Brews & Hunt (1999) Planning school Learning school

Seely Brown & Hagel (2005)

Push system Pull systems

Hutchins (1991) Supervisor reflection and intervention

Local adjustment

Truex et al (2000) Traditional design Emergent design

March (1991) Exploitation Exploration

Boehm & Turner (2003) Plan-driven Agile

Mintzberg (1989) Deliberate strategy Emergent Strategy

Kurtz & Snowden (2007)

Idealistic Naturalistic

Description

Analysis

Suggestions


http://reformsymposium.com/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/richardstubbs/5934222024/

Big picture

Continue Take up

residency

http://www.flickr.com/photos/drbeachvacation/3156587879/

Removal of first order barriers(Ertmer, 1999; Prestridge,

2010)

Government

ImproveTrue

1:1

Technical support

Infrastructure &facilities

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ell-r-brown/4458510670/

Become digital residents

Politicians

Teacher educators

School leaders

Teachers

Emergent resident creation

http://www.flickr.com/photos/krossbow/3279873902/

Understand the “digital” world

Change politics

Change the grammar of school!

http://bit.ly/p6LaLs

Change

Diversity

ANAO. (2010). Digital Education Revolution Program – National Secondary Schools Computer Fund. Education (p. 148). Canberra, ACT, Australia.

Boehm, B., & Turner, R. (2003). Using risk to balance agile and plan-driven methods. Computer, 36(6), 57-66.

Brews, P., & Hunt, M. (1999). Learning to plan and planning to learn: Resolving the planning school/learning school debate. Strategic Management, 20(10), 889-913.

Bush, M. (2009). The Transformation of Learning with Technology: Learner-Centricity, Content and Tool Malleability, and Network Effects. Educational Technology, 49(2), 3-20. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/recordDetail?accno=EJ829873&_nfls=false

Collins, A., & Halverson, R. (2009). Rethinking education in the age of technology: The digital revolution and schooling in America. New York: Teachers College Press.

DEEWR. (2010). ICT strategic planning guide for Australian schools (p. 16). Canberra, ACT, Australia. Retrieved from http://www.deewr.gov.au/Schooling/DigitalEducationRevolution/DigitalStrategyforTeachers/Documents/ICTStratPlanGuide.pdf

Ertmer, P. a. (1999). Addressing first- and second-order barriers to change: Strategies for technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(4), 47-61. doi:10.1007/BF02299597

Geoghegan, W. (1994). Whatever happened to instructional technology? In S. Bapna, A. Emdad, & J. Zaveri (Eds.), (pp. 438-447). Baltimore, MD: IBM. Retrieved from http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/10144/

Harpur, J. (2011, August 1). New technology yet we tread the same old path. Sydney Morning Hearld. Sydney, Australia. Retrieved from http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/new-technology-yet-we-tread-the-same-old-path-20110731-1i6aw.html

Hutchins, E. (1991). Organizing work by adaptation. Organization Science, 2(1), 14-39.

Introna, L. (1996). Notes on ateleological information systems development. Information Technology & People, 9(4), 20-39.

Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1). Retrieved from http://www.citejournal.org/vol9/iss1/general/article1.cfm

Kurtz, C., & Snowden, D. (2007). Bramble Bushes in a Thicket: Narrative and the intangiables of learning networks. In M. Gibbert & T. Durand (Eds.), . Blackwell.

March, J. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71-87.

Mintzberg, H. (1989). Mintzberg on Management, Inside our Strange World of Organisations. New York: Free Press.

Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.

Moyle, K. (2010). Building Innovation: Learning with technologies. Educational Research. Camberwell, VIC, Australia. Retrieved from http://research.acer.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1009&context=aer

Papert, S. (1984). New theories for new learnings. School Psychology Review, 13(4), 422-428.

Prestridge, S. (2010). The alignment of digital pedagogy to current teacher beliefs. In D. Gronn & G. Romeo (Eds.), ACEC2010: Digital Diversity. Melbourne, Australia: Australian Council for Computers in Education. Retrieved from http://acec2010.info/proposal/252/beliefs-behind-teacher-influences-their-ict-practices

Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155-169.

Saettler, P. (1968). History of Instructional Technology. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Santayana, G. (2010). The life of reason: The phases of human progress (Vol. 1). Charleston, SC: Forgotten Books.

Seely-Brown, J., & Hagel, J. (2005). From push to pull: The next frontier of innovation. The McKinsey Quarterly. McKinsey & Company. Retrieved from http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/article_page.aspx?ar=1642

Stager, G. (2008, June). What’s a Computer For? Part 1. District Administration Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.districtadministration.com/viewarticle.aspx?articleid=1604

The National GAP. (2009). Key issues to consider in the renewal of learning and teaching experiences to foster graduate attributes. Sydney: The National Graduate Attributes Project.

Trigwell, K. (2001). Judging university teaching. The International Journal for Academic Development, 6(1), 65-73.

Truex, D., Baskerville, R., & Travis, J. (2000). Amethodical systems development: the deferred meaning of systems development methods. Accounting Management and Information Technologies, 10, 53-79.

Tyack, D., & Tobin, W. (1994). The “grammar” of schooling: why has it been so hard to change? American Educational Research Journal, 31(3), 453-479. Retrieved from http://aer.sagepub.com/content/31/3/453.short

Ward, J., & Daniel, E. (2006). Benefits management: delivering value from IS and IT investments (John Wiley.). Chichester, UK.

Weick, K., & Quinn, R. (1999). Organizational change and development. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 361-386.

Date post:	16-May-2015
Category:	Education
Upload:	david-jones
View:	3,082 times
Download:	0 times